Which to buy - WBTS or FoF

[ddodger]

I'm looking a strategic level ACW game and I would like to know what you guys think are the major differences between WBTS and FoF. I would like to know how they stack up against each other in a few important categories. For example:

1. Which game best models research, economic production, recruitment and other long term strategic planning?

2. Which game does a better job of handling combat?

3. How do the two games handle command and control?

4. How do the two games compare in terms of user interface and graphics?

5. Which game has the higher learning curve?

6. Do the two different game systems produce historical results?

7. If you could only have one of these games, which one would it be?

I really appreciate any input because I'm in the situation where I can't afford to get both.

[Erik Rutins]

I'll let other unaffiliated folks comment on your questions, but I can tell you this - whichever one you get, you'll have a great game that will keep you entertained for quite a long time.

[Titanwarrior89]

#7 War between the states.

ORIGINAL: ddodger

I'm looking a strategic level ACW game and I would like to know what you guys think are the major differences between WBTS and FoF. I would like to know how they stack up against each other in a few important categories. For example:

1. Which game best models research, economic production, recruitment and other long term strategic planning?

2. Which game does a better job of handling combat?

3. How do the two games handle command and control?

4. How do the two games compare in terms of user interface and graphics?

5. Which game has the higher learning curve?

6. Do the two different game systems produce historical results?

7. If you could only have one of these games, which one would it be?

I really appreciate any input because I'm in the situation where I can't afford to get both.

[moose1999]

I don't own WBTS yet (will soon) but I can tell you this:
You can't afford not to own FOF.
It is a brilliant game, combining tactical level combat with strategic level, but can just as well be played only on the strategic level.
Endless customization possibilities of your units, loads of wonderful details.
I'll never tire of that game.
But WBTS seems to do it's own great thing too, so my advice is the old "buy'em both" cliché.
Buy one now, play it to boredom (warning - won't happen anytime soon with FOF) and then buy the second one and start again.
Rinse and repeat.

[XLegion]

WAR BETWEEN THE STATES without question. I'm not affiliated with either product, just an average Joe who is interested in the Civil War and have purchased every strategic Civil War game out there except AGEOD's game.

I owned Forge of Freedom for about one year but finally just gave up on it. There were a lot of patches and upgrades (and that is a good thing) but I really hated the large area system and the game had so much 'chrome' there was more 'chrome' than game.

Just my opinion. There are many who think it is a great product. But I have to go with Mr. Grigsby's design. The learning curve is tremendous but it is one hell of a simulation and game.

[incbob]

I have owned FOF and I have WBTS, but I am just getting into WBTS.

WBTS is a FAR more historical game and more like a good old fashioned board game. WBTS is more about strategy and you don't have to worry about micromanaging that.

FOF is more like CIV meets the Civil War. Far more flexibility, far less historical aspect, more of a what might have been. Far more micromanaging.

I agree with the above poster. Either game and you are fine it just depends upon whether you would like a simple historical, with some slight variance game or would you like a micromanaging anything goes game.

[Missouri_Rebel]

Briny speaks the truth.
FoF is my favorite game of all time and I probably have over 400 hours playing it. Excellent and engrossing game with very thoughtful structure. But that doesn't mean that WBTS is not worth buying. To be fair, I just havent had much time with it yet.

I would suggest looking into the AAR's of both titles.

Sorry, not much help I know. We really are blessed to have good games to choose from these days.

mo reb

[PDiFolco]

I have both FoF and AACW, but not yet WBTS: one of the problem I had with both other games is that they're heavy on mm, and I have not enough time and memory to be good at that [:'(]... So what about WBTS? I have WaW and liked the "strategic" scale (it was sometimes too much "strategic" ie lacked details), and also the rather easy/fast gameplay. Has WBTS inherited this ? Reading some posts here giving information on several aspects I'm not so sure, some players look a bit lost in complications... [&:]

[willgamer]

I've played AGEOD's game and now this one since they were available (but not FOF).

These 2 games are both wonderful. The AGEOD game tends more toward the simulation side and WBTS to a boardgame.

IMHO, the burden of micromanagement in the AGEOD game decreases fun factor a lot (e.g. it's great fun to plan and build divisions one component at a time, however, the interface is not intuitive and rather tedious). OTOH, GG seems to have put a lot of thought into streamlining WBTS.

Final answer: WBTS[:D]

[Crimguy]

I have all three.  I like all three a lot.  When I got FOF, I think I didn't put an hour of work in at my office b/c I was playing nonstop.

I bought AACW at its' release and still play.  Just love the game and put it at one of the best turn based strategy games of all time.  It's only problem is the AI can make fatal mistakes when it's not hammering you.

I have WBTS for a week and am just beginning to figure it out.  Funny, the worry of most of us was that it would be a dumbed-down wargame.  Not the case at all.  It's proving to be a very deep, flexible system.

So . . . get all of them, but for me I go for AACW followed by WBTS, then FOF.  I never liked the tactical battles in that one.

[Crimguy]

I should also point out that AACW's PBEM, while serviceable, is a bit tedious.  Multiple files need to be sent back and forth.

[LarryP]

I'll give you an answer that won't help you much AND is very different from the other posts. I own all three Civil War games mentioned here: FoF, WBtS, and AACW. I play all three at different moods and all three satisfy every one of those times. Each one has options the others lack, so buying all three is my recommendation. [:D]

EDIT at 4:04pm : I see Crimguy posted that he also has all three. We must have been writing our posts at the same time and he finished first! So much for being the first to say I have all three games! [&:]

[Crimguy]

At least we agree on the same point.  They're all good.  There's so much crap out there that anyone looking for an AMerican Civil War game is in a great position.

War Between the States
Forge of Freedom
AGEod's American Civil War
Take Command Second Manassas

That's some good stuff there!

[dthornburg]

I own FoF and WBtS and I have enjoyed playing both. I think they are both challenging for what each brings to the table but I think I prefer the slightly simpler management aspect of WBTS. I have tried the AGEOD game but I did play their American War of Independence game and thought it was pretty good.

As a side note; I 'grew-up' on the original Battleground Civil War series (John Tiller games) and loved everyone one of them, especially the Chickamauga game.

Dave

[oldspec4]

ORIGINAL: Crimguy

At least we agree on the same point.  They're all good.  There's so much crap out there that anyone looking for an AMerican Civil War game is in a great position.

War Between the States
Forge of Freedom
AGEod's American Civil War
Take Command Second Manassas

That's some good stuff there!

Yep...got 'em all plus the HPS and Battleground titles. Can never be enough good ACW games.

[LarryP]

ORIGINAL: Crimguy

At least we agree on the same point. They're all good. There's so much crap out there that anyone looking for an AMerican Civil War game is in a great position.

War Between the States
Forge of Freedom
AGEod's American Civil War
Take Command Second Manassas

That's some good stuff there!

Yep, got 2nd Manassas too and it's also a great game. [:)]

[ETF]

I have all three and if you want a detailed realistic wargame I would go with AACW. All are good but I love detail and realism and that gets my vote.

[LarryP]

ORIGINAL: ETF

I have all three and if you want a detailed realistic wargame I would go with AACW. All are good but I love detail and realism and that gets my vote.

I've spent a lot of hours playing AGEOD's AACW as well as Napoleon's Campaigns. As far as detail, they leave out the micromanagement part but rely heavily on troop management. That's one reason I say that they all have something that the others lack. Pull out the plastic and buy all of them! [;)]

[kaybayray]

Greetings [8D]

I am struggeling with the same decision. I dont own any of these games at the moment. I do own many of the old table top board games and computer games of this type. I also have many many years of Miniature play in 15mm Napoleonics. I prefer some tactical play included with a game. I have been looking at this game as well as Forge of Freedom. I am leaning toward Forge of Freedom because it includes tactical play in the form of detailed battles. I like the idea of Fire and Manuver in a game. It lets me out fox an opponent that is better equipped and outnumberes me to actually win a battle. So I will continue researching these boards.

Thanks all for the great insight and information!!! [&o]

Later,
KayBay

[LarryP]

ORIGINAL: kaybayray

Greetings [8D]

I am struggeling with the same decision. I dont own any of these games at the moment. I do own many of the old table top board games and computer games of this type. I also have many many years of Miniature play in 15mm Napoleonics. I prefer some tactical play included with a game. I have been looking at this game as well as Forge of Freedom. I am leaning toward Forge of Freedom because it includes tactical play in the form of detailed battles. I like the idea of Fire and Manuver in a game. It lets me out fox an opponent that is better equipped and outnumberes me to actually win a battle. So I will continue researching these boards.

Thanks all for the great insight and information!!! [&o]

Later,
KayBay

If detailed battles are what you like then FoF is the game for you. Choose "Strategic Battles" and you will be in for all the detailed battles you could ever want. I choose the "Quick Battles" as I prefer to just get them over with. Sometimes I will do the Strategic Battles and I am always impressed with the amount of details and options I have. It's hex based combat at its best! FoF also has plenty of micromanagement. It sets the mood for that time period very well too if you have the music on.

Let us know what you decide to buy. [:)]